/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.8831229]

Post the sexiest math symbols and equations.

[Anonymous No.8831245]

/thread
captcha: yield sign

[Anonymous No.8831253]

Who cannot appreciate this shit?

[Anonymous No.8831263]

[math] \otimes [\math]

[Anonymous No.8831272]

>>8831229
The product of the Jews and Germans divided by the Jews is less than that of the Germans

<Germans, Jews>/|Jews| ≤ |Germans|

[Anonymous No.8831273]

[math](N=1) \vee (P=0)[/math]

[Anonymous No.8831281]

>>8831229
Daily reminder of that one time based Wildberger revolutionized the symbol industry by introducing the heart.

[Anonymous No.8831295]

>>8831273
faggot

[Anonymous No.8831333]

d'Alembert operator

[Anonymous No.8831344]

Group theory in general. And especially one of the very simplest theorems:
[math]\mid A \mid = \mid A : B \mid \cdot \mid B \mid[/math]

[Anonymous No.8831350]

>reading article/book/assignment/whatever
>typesetted in LaTeX
>see a box
>not sure if missing font or d'Alembert operator

I was once correcting some general relativity exams and a guy had checked a d'Alembert operator like it was a checkbox on the exam sheet. Best symbol ever.

[Anonymous No.8831429]

>>8831253
>1/2*pi
>not 1/tau

[Anonymous No.8831437]

>>8831350
that things square.... square HAHAHA

[Anonymous No.8831449]

>>8831429
>1/2*pi
Please don't do this, not everyone assigns * a strictly higher precedence than /
You wouldn't write 1-2+pi to mean 1-(2+pi) either

[Anonymous No.8831457]

>>8831229

Post your H2 O jokes.

[Anonymous No.8831460]

These two
>>>8831111

[Anonymous No.8831523]

>>8831253
1/2π on the inverse tranform and nothing on the other is for homosexual engineers

[Anonymous No.8831665]

Lambda is the only naturally occurring constant.

[Anonymous No.8831668]

>>8831665
It definitely is the greatest symbol in mathematics but not because it represents some silly constant.

[Anonymous No.8831677]

>>8831253
hey nice coincidence, got my electronic circuits/networks final in 2 days

[Anonymous No.8831915]

>sexiest math symbols and equations

[Anonymous No.8831923]

[Anonymous No.8831956]

>>8831350
Ayy lmao what the fuck

[Anonymous No.8833023]

[math]\int[/math]

[Anonymous No.8834598]

I got so freaked out with the 1/2pi even though I'm using it this semester

[Anonymous No.8835603]

I like this one because it always make me think of pic related.

[Anonymous No.8835612]

>>8831523
Your face is unitary

[Anonymous No.8835652]

>>8831333
>a box
Physicists have no souls

[Anonymous No.8835905]

>>8831229
58008

[Anonymous No.8836077]

probably depends on your definition of math symbol, but my vote goes to this bad girl

[Anonymous No.8836090]

>>8836077

I'll always see this as a hand holding a crowbar.

[Anonymous No.8836097]

>>8836090
cannot unsee

[Anonymous No.8836103]

[math] \delta [/math]
fairly pleb.
I changed my initials to a linked [math] \delta S [/math] not so long ago.

[Anonymous No.8836323]

>>8831523
>homosexual engineers
Nice pleonasm mate

[Anonymous No.8836351]

[Anonymous No.8836369]

>>8836351
C'mon, man. This is a blue board.

[Anonymous No.8836371]

[math]\Gamma_{\alpha \beta \gamma} = g_{\alpha \delta} \Gamma^{\delta}_{\space \beta \gamma}[/math]

[Anonymous No.8836373]

[eqn]\to[/eqn]

>>8836077
Combinatory logic is more elegant than lambda-calculus desu
Unfortunately the standard notation -- using ((gf)x) to denote composition instead of g(f(x)) -- severely obscures the (Curry-Howard) connection between combinatory logic and the rest of mathematics, which probably explains its current status of being 4everalone and isolated from the rest of mathematics.

Probably the second biggest mistake of functional theory, after the decision to use [math]g\circ f[/math] (i.e., gf) to denote the process of "first performing f and then performing g".
100 years later and I'm still mad

[Anonymous No.8836374]

>>8836090
oh fuck, so that's why it is half-life logo
MIND = BLOWN

[Anonymous No.8836385]

>>8836371

>trivial example of index gymnastics.

[Anonymous No.8836537]

>>8831229
Not posting the sexiest equation.

[Anonymous No.8836581]

>>8831253
the kerning on

[math]
\exp(-i \omega t)
[/math]

is awful.

[Anonymous No.8836590]

8=>

[Anonymous No.8836603]

>>8836373
>combinatory logic
>more elegant than lambda-calculus

>g o f is hard to understand

brainlet opinion discarded

[Anonymous No.8836714]

[math]{\text{H}}_{et}^k\left( {{{\bar X}_p},{\mathbb{Q}_\ell }} \right) \otimes \mathbb{C} \cong {{\text{H}}^k}\left( {X,\mathbb{C}} \right)[/math]

[Anonymous No.8836806]

Angular velocity looks like a thicc booty ω ω ω

[Anonymous No.8836855]

[eqn]\oint \\ \prod \\ \nabla \\ \pi[/eqn]

[Anonymous No.8837770]

>>8831281
cute

[Anonymous No.8837775]

8=D ~~

[Anonymous No.8837828]

>>8837775
Balls-cox-sprem operator.

[Anonymous No.8837883]

>>8836090
Half-Life 3 Confermed

[Anonymous No.8837897]

>>8836714
what are these scribbles

[Anonymous No.8837901]

>>8831344
Do you know how I know you're an undergrad?

[Anonymous No.8837941]

>>8837897
For a smooth variety over C, the usual cohomology is isomorphic to the l-adic cohomology (tensored C) of the variety taken mod p.

[Anonymous No.8837961]

>>8837901
Because he uses \mid instead of \left| \right| ?

[Anonymous No.8838070]

It's obviously the Sha

[Anonymous No.8838080]

>>8836351
What the fuck is a "closed" triple integral? I suppose you need to integrate a volume embedded in R^4?

[Anonymous No.8838162]

this

[Anonymous No.8838410]

>>8831229

[math]2^{\aleph_0} = \aleph_1[\math]

[Anonymous No.8838415]

>>8838410
>>8831229


let's try that again

[math]2^{\aleph_0} = \aleph_1[/math]

[Anonymous No.8838455]

>>8838162
>index notation

[Anonymous No.8839076]

[eqn] \frac{K}{M} = \frac{H}{L} \phantom{(loss)} [/eqn]

[Anonymous No.8839619]

>>8837941
what is a good book on (co)homology?

I'm literally fine with every subject around it (schemes, basic abelian category theory, (non-algebraic) topology, etc.) but have never been able to /into/ (co)homology.

I can even kind of get basic stuff with chain complexes and all; it's the actual applications (such as the one given in your equation) and computation tricks that I'm missing almost totally.

[Anonymous No.8839633]

>>8836373
yeah sorry this is a Bad Opinion.

elements should just be thought of as global sections and the connection to CCCs is automatic and your notational issue doesn't even come up.

[Anonymous No.8839744]

>>8831229
I've always liked the drag equation myself.
[math]\frac{1}{2}\rho u^{2}C_{d}A [/math]

[Anonymous No.8839832]

>>8831923
my nigger

[Anonymous No.8839858]

>>8839619
I would say just open up Ch.3 of Hartshorne and work through every exercise.

Maybe read something on De Rham Cohomology first in order to get some topological intuition into place.

[Anonymous No.8839876]

>>8831449
and stop the "let's not write out * in algebra" BS too. It was a bad idea.

[Anonymous No.8839958]

I love the del tilde but I've never seen it used. As for Greek letters my favourite is the zeta. The dagger is also pretty sweet.

[Anonymous No.8840042]

>>8839076
is this gauss/mean curvature and coefficients of the FFF?

[Anonymous No.8840293]

Verlinde formula is the greatest thing to ever come out of knot theory

[Anonymous No.8840308]

>>8840293

you know what I always found funny about mathematical physics?

neither mathematicians nor physicists care about it.

[Anonymous No.8840418]

>>8838410
>>8838415
Prove it :^)

[Anonymous No.8840569]

>>8838455
not just the notation! it's what that simple symbol is capable of!

[Anonymous No.8840585]

>>8836374
I hope you aren't serious

[Anonymous No.8840598]

>>8831229
>focusing on the symbols instead of the things they represent
Pseud confirmed.

[Anonymous No.8841619]

[math]\partial_{\beta}F^{\alpha \beta} = 4\pi J^{\alpha} [/math]

[math]
\partial_{\alpha}F_{\beta \gamma} + \partial_{\beta}F_{\gamma \alpha} + \partial_{\gamma}F_{\alpha \beta} = 0[/math]

[Anonymous No.8841740]

>>8837961
I wondered why the spacing looked so fucking atrocious.)

[Anonymous No.8842504]

[Anonymous No.8842525]

>>8841619
[math]dF = \ast J[/math]
[math]d\ast F = d^2 A = 0[/math]